Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 04:09:09 08/06/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 05, 2003 at 04:58:39, Bo Persson wrote: Eugenes first posting suggested there is ZERO assembly inside: Later postings he has come back to that when he finally checked out some of the source code. I wonder how a compiler department could possibly access x86 source code of the NT kernel. I bet they do not have it there at his itanium department... ----------------------------------------------------------- Posted by Eugene Nalimov (Profile) on August 03, 2003 at 16:52:17: In Reply to: glory of windows posted by Vincent Diepeveen on August 03, 2003 at 15:22:19: Sorry, I'll be clearer this time: (Talking about claim that Windows kernel is written in the assembler) SARCASM ON: This is definitely so, especially if you take into account that NT/2k/XP variants were commercially sold not only for x86, but for PowerPC, MIPS, Alpha, and IA-64 CPUs. Of course MS wrote 5 kernels in the different assembler languages... SARCASM OFF. Vincent is the only source from which I hear that fact. And if I have to choose between Vincent's words and NT source code on one of my developer's machine, I'll trust the later... Thanks, Eugene Thanks, Eugene >On August 04, 2003 at 11:26:36, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On August 04, 2003 at 09:43:40, Bo Persson wrote: >> >>>Ok, we agree that there is "some assembly required". I can see that it might be >>>0.1%, or 0.5%. or even 1.0% of the code base. I wouldn't call that "so much", or >>>see that it would be a problem to move it to x86-64 when they have already tried >>>it out for Alpha, Itanium, and others. >>> >>>If you think otherwise, fine. >> >>you are just guessing a % here. the entire kernel is assembly though. > >Yes, I am just guessing here. Unlike Eugene I don't have the source at hand. > >Let's call it an "estimate", and not a guess. You pointed out that kernel32.dll >didn't look like C code. I don't know that, but can see that it is a small file >and even though it contains a lot of text resources, it is still only 0.1% of >the total file sizes of my /winnt directory. > >So I made a guess, that maybe even 5 or 10 times that much could be assembly >code. It would still be no more than 1% of the total size. I don't call that >"much", or "the entire kernel". > >> >>let's be clear. i'm not saying that the entire kernel being assembly is a >>problem to move it. seemingly reading nalimov's words correctly they have a C >>version too, which for the itanium i can consider as being a good idea. writing >>assembly for it is a horror. >> >>For the x86-64 i bet they want an assembly version too, because the platform is >>going to be very important. > >Or they could make sure that they have one of the best compilers available. >Guess what Eugene is working on. :-) > > >I once got my first copy of the MS C compiler with the Windows 1.0 beta. Wonder >why! > > >> >>linux does not have such problems. there is hardly software working for it! > >:-) > > >Bo Persson >bop2@telia.com
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.